Side by sideSuburb comparison

Pleasure Point vs East Hills.

Suburb-to-suburb comparison across price, growth, lifestyle, schools and risk. Pleasure Point edges out on more headline metrics in this comparison.

On school quality, the average ICSEA across schools serving Pleasure Point (1049) sits above East Hills (1040). Pleasure Point skews owner-occupied (86%), East Hills runs more rental-dense (64% owner).

The takeWhich suburb suits which buyer

For buyers

We don't yet have verified suburb-level medians for one or both of these suburbs. Check the individual profiles for the data we do publish, and the methodology page for how we source it.

For investors

Rental or growth data is incomplete for one or both suburbs. Look at the full investor view on each suburb profile for a complete picture.

For families

Pleasure Point edges out on average school ICSEA (1049 vs 1040). Pleasure Point also has a higher family-household share (90% vs 71%), so the catchment community skews family-heavy.

Common questionsPleasure Point vs East Hills

Common questions

Does Pleasure Point or East Hills have better schools?

On average school ICSEA (the ACARA index that benchmarks educational advantage), Pleasure Point scores 1049 vs 1040 in East Hills. ICSEA is a school-community indicator, not a quality rating, so always check NAPLAN results and catchment boundaries for the specific address you're considering.

The numbers behind the take

Pleasure Point
Metric
East Hills

Price & Market

Median house
Median unit
+0.0%
Annual growth (house)
+0.0%
Days on market

Rental

$369/wk
Rent (house / wk)
$470/wk
$500/wk
Rent (unit / wk)
$375/wk
86.0%
Owner occupied
64.0%
11.0%
Renter occupied
34.0%

Lifestyle & Demographics

0
Walk score
0
0
Transit score
10
100
Bike score
100
606
Population
3,370
39
Median age
41

Risk & Hazard

Flood class
Bushfire risk

Schools

20
Schools nearby
20
1049
Avg ICSEA
1040

Climate

1302 mm
Annual rainfall
1302 mm
26.0°C
Mean max (Jan)
26.0°C

Green dot = better on that metric (lower price, higher growth, higher walkability, lower risk).